Search

In this paper, we report findings from a qualitative, multidisciplinary analysis of 20 Child Practice Reviews (CPRs) (previously Serious Case Review) in Wales. The reviews were analysed from three different disciplinary perspectives: law, criminology and practice (social work). The following cross‐cutting themes were identified from our coding of the reviews: (i) hierarchy of knowledge, where certain sources of knowledge were privileged over others; (ii) information sharing/recording, where deficiencies of sharing or recording of information were evident; (iii) partial assessment, where certain assessments were not always holistic; and lastly, (iv) voice of the child, where the experience or perspective of the child was not always considered. In addition, our analysis revealed a range of challenges to the CPR process as implemented. This paper is the first to explore themes emerging from (Welsh) CPRs and is also the first to do so from a multidisciplinary perspective. We conclude by highlighting the recommendations for practice, such as the need for greater learning pan‐Wales, regular publication of the major themes emerging from CPRs and the need for deposit of CPRs in a central repository to facilitate learning from reviews. 'Report[s] findings from a qualitative, multidisciplinary analysis of 20 Child Practice Reviews... in Wales' Key Practitioner Messages: There is an urgent need for multidisciplinary training on contemporary data protection requirements as per the General Data Protection Regulation for all safeguarding boards.Creative methods are required to disseminate the messages from Child Practice Reviews more widely.Child Practice Reviews should be deposited and indexed in a central repository to facilitate learning across Wales.Guidance and training for Child Practice Reviews should be revisited, so that the child is repositioned at the centre of the process and the voice of the child is heard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes a model of multi-agency consultation created for social workers and other allied professionals working with Looked After Children. THINKSPACE is based on a reflecting team model as developed by Andersen (1987). This paper describes some of the dilemmas and solutions faced when implementing the model and incorporates feedback from those providing and using the service.THINKSPACE has had a significant impact on creating a shared understanding of a child’s behaviour and needs across agencies, containing the system’s anxiety about a case, and at times ensuring that the relevant agencies are informed and appropriately involved in a child’s care plan. It is a successful example of the Government’s drive for multi-agency working and has allowed professionals to work together effectively across agencies to support some of the most vulnerable Looked After Children. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]